A federal judge has sharply rebuked the Trump administration after around 500 trees were removed from a historic public golf course in Washington, DC, triggering fresh questions over the government’s handling of a lawsuit challenging its renovation plans.
US District Judge Ana Reyes expressed anger during a Monday hearing, describing the tree removal at East Potomac Golf Links as “inexcusable” and accusing Justice Department officials of undermining their credibility before the court.
“I am just deeply disappointed in the government,” Reyes told administration representatives, questioning how officials could have considered the work acceptable despite her earlier warnings.
The removal operation began on Friday afternoon, even though Reyes had indicated in May that the government should provide advance notice before undertaking any substantial construction work at the site. The judge said the failure to notify the group challenging the project had seriously damaged the administration’s standing in the case.
Reyes issued a temporary order halting further tree removal and warned that violating the restriction could lead to proceedings to determine whether government officials should be held in contempt of court.
She also acknowledged that her earlier instructions about advance notice had not been incorporated into a formal written order. That omission, she said, was the main reason she had not initiated contempt proceedings immediately.
During the hearing, Justice Department lawyer Marissa Piropato said government attorneys had worked to collect information about the tree-cutting operation for submission to the court.
Reyes rejected that explanation in unusually forceful terms.
“You did not do your best,” she said. “You did your absolute worst.”
Fight Over the Future of a Historic Public Course
The dispute centres on East Potomac Golf Links, a century-old public course owned by the federal government and managed by the National Park Service under the Interior Department.
President Donald Trump announced plans to overhaul the facility last year. A keen golfer who owns several courses, Trump has said he wants the renovated site to be capable of hosting major tournaments.
The proposed transformation has drawn opposition from preservationists, who argue that the administration is putting an important historic and recreational asset at risk.
The DC Preservation League filed a lawsuit in February 2026, alleging that the project violated environmental protections and threatened irreversible damage to a site of national significance. The organisation also raised concerns that a public recreation area could be turned into a premium golfing destination with a more exclusive character.
Reyes had warned administration representatives during a May hearing that major construction work carried out without prior notification to the court could have serious consequences.
However, in a filing submitted on October 9, the government asked the judge to dismiss the case, arguing that the litigation was premature because the proposed renovation remained at an early, conceptual stage.
The subsequent removal of hundreds of trees intensified the dispute. Lawyers for the preservation group sought emergency intervention on Sunday, arguing that the work had proceeded despite the judge’s earlier warning and could cause lasting damage.
Reyes temporarily halted further tree cutting until Tuesday morning. During Monday’s hearing, she indicated that the restriction would likely remain in place until the court could hear testimony from Gregory Wischer, a deputy chief of staff at the Interior Department.
Administration Defends the Tree Removal
A National Park Service official offered a different account of the work, telling the court that the tree removal was intended to improve public safety and restore the golf course’s original design.
Kevin Griess also argued that the operation formed part of a plan developed in 2019, before Trump’s renovation ambitions for the property emerged.
That explanation has not eased the judge’s concerns about how the work was carried out or why the preservation group was not notified.
The case also unfolds against a broader backdrop of Trump’s efforts to reshape American cultural and historical institutions, including museums, monuments, national parks and arts centres.
For now, the immediate question is whether the administration will comply with the court’s restrictions while the legal challenge moves forward. Reyes’s warning has made clear that further work at the site could bring additional judicial scrutiny, particularly if officials proceed without the court’s approval.
